Walter Bright wrote:
> Fixes many bugs, some serious.
>
> Some new goodies.
>
> http://www.digitalmars.com/d/changelog.html
>
> http://ftp.digitalmars.com/dmd.1.005.zip
The new mixin stuff with the quotes seems a bit left of field. However
I'd imagine you could write some very reusable code with the string
con-concatenation stuff, although I'll bet it'll make things very hard
to debug. Maybe even use the strings for some kinda meta/reflection
coding. I can't wait to see some real-world examples.
-Joel

Walter Bright wrote:
> Fixes many bugs, some serious.
>
> Some new goodies.
>
> http://www.digitalmars.com/d/changelog.html
>
> http://ftp.digitalmars.com/dmd.1.005.zip
You fixed all the bugs I've added in recent memory. Plus, if I
understand correctly, the implications of some of these features is
staggering...
It looks like one could write a few hundred line module that can pull in
and do compile-time interpreting of a language of the complexity of say,
Scheme. And the code in the module could be both readable and
straightforward... And the results would be absorbed into the calling
code as normal optimizable statements...
"I warn you, Doctor -- man was not meant to have this kind of power!"
Kevin

Kevin Bealer wrote:
> Walter Bright wrote:
>> Fixes many bugs, some serious.
>>
>> Some new goodies.
>>
>> http://www.digitalmars.com/d/changelog.html
>>
>> http://ftp.digitalmars.com/dmd.1.005.zip
>
> You fixed all the bugs I've added in recent memory. Plus, if I
> understand correctly, the implications of some of these features is
> staggering...
>
> It looks like one could write a few hundred line module that can pull in
> and do compile-time interpreting of a language of the complexity of say,
> Scheme. And the code in the module could be both readable and
> straightforward... And the results would be absorbed into the calling
> code as normal optimizable statements...
>
> "I warn you, Doctor -- man was not meant to have this kind of power!"
>
> Kevin
My thoughts exactly.
And it only warrants a version number increase of 0.001 ??? <g>

Kevin Bealer wrote:
> You fixed all the bugs I've added in recent memory. Plus, if I
> understand correctly, the implications of some of these features is
> staggering...
>
> It looks like one could write a few hundred line module that can pull in
> and do compile-time interpreting of a language of the complexity of say,
> Scheme. And the code in the module could be both readable and
> straightforward... And the results would be absorbed into the calling
> code as normal optimizable statements...
The irony is that it only took 3 hours to implement, which shows the
power of having the lexing, parsing, and semantic passes be logically
distinct.
The idea is to enable the creation of DSLs (Domain Specific Languages)
that don't have the crippling problem C++ expression templates have -
that of being stuck with C++ operators and precedence.
To make this work, however, one must be able to manipulate strings at
compile time. I've made a start on a library to do this,
std.metastrings, based on earlier work by Don Clugston and Eric Anderton.
This is just the start of what's going to happen with D 2.0.

Walter Bright wrote:
> Fixes many bugs, some serious.
>
> Some new goodies.
>
> http://www.digitalmars.com/d/changelog.html
>
> http://ftp.digitalmars.com/dmd.1.005.zip
Sounds like some nice new features, but even though the compiler seems to
know that these new features are D 2.0, the spec don't show it. I'd suggest
to branch the specification now, after all 1.0 shouldn't see any new
feature changes. Without this, there is no point in the 1.0 marker
whatsoever.
--
Lars Ivar Igesund
blog at http://larsivi.net
DSource & #D: larsivi
Dancing the Tango